Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Revealed reader preference for marketing journals

  • Original Empirical Research
  • Published:
Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this paper we assess the reading preference for marketing journals by deriving a journal utility scale based on click responses to table of contents postings to the ELMAR virtual community. Use of ELMAR data provides a unique window into journal importance, allowing us to look at table of contents reading behavior rather than citing behavior or attitudinal constructs as has been the case in previous studies. At the time of the study, there were more than 5,100 ELMAR subscribers, easily making this the largest journal ranking study ever undertaken. The external validity of our sample is high since ELMAR subscribers include a high percentage of the population of those interested in scholarly research in marketing. Our results are based on actual choice behavior of subscribers as they simply decide what tables of contents to read. The list of journals included in the study contains 165 different titles posted during the study period, which spanned a year. During that period there were multiple issues posted of these 165 journals, resulting in a replicated field study with high reliability. In fact, our journal reading utility measurement yielded a model with an R2 value of .95. We use this model to suggest ways that researchers might come to a richer understanding of the journal consumption process.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Figure 1
Figure 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aaker, D. A., Kumar, V., & George, S. D. (2001). Marketing research, seventh edition. New York: John Wiley and Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bauerly, R. J., & Johnson, D. T. (2005). An evaluation of journals used in doctoral marketing programs. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 33(3), 313–329. doi:10.1177/0092070304272052.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baumgartner, H., & Pieters, R. (2003). The structural influence of marketing journals: a citation analysis of the discipline and its subareas over time. Journal of Marketing, 67(2), 123–139. doi:10.1509/jmkg.67.2.123.18610.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ben-Akiva, M., Bradley, M., Morikawa, T., Benjamin, J., Novak, T. P., Oppewal, H., et al. (1994). Combining revealed and stated preference data. Marketing Letters, 5(4), 335–350. doi:10.1007/BF00999209.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Browne, W. G., & Becker, B. W. (1979). Perceived quality of marketing journals. Journal of Marketing Education, 1(November), 6–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coe, R. K., & Weinstock, I. (1983). Evaluating journal publications of marketing professors: a second look. Journal of Marketing Education, 5, 37–42 (Spring). doi:10.1177/027347538300500107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corstjens, M. A., & Gautsch, D. A. (1983). Formal choice models in marketing. Marketing Science, 2(1), 19–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DuBois, F. L., & Reeb, D. (2000). Ranking the international business journals. Journal of International Business Studies, 31(4), 689–704. doi:10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490929.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fitzsimmons, G. J., & Morwitz, V. G. (1996). The effect of measuring intent on brand-level purchase behavior. The Journal of Consumer Research, 23, 1–11. doi:10.1086/209462.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fry, E. H., Walters, C. G., & Scheuermann, L. E. (1985). Perceived quality of fifty selected journals: academicians and practitioners. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 13, 352–361 (Spring). doi:10.1007/BF02729725.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldman, A. (1979). Publishing activity in marketing as an indicator of its structure and disciplinary boundaries. Journal of Marketing Research, 16(4), 485–494. doi:10.2307/3150809.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guadagni, P. M., & Little, J. D. C. (1983). A logit model of brand choice calibrated on scanner data. Marketing Science, 12(3), 203–238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guidry, J. A., Brandi, N., Guidry, H., Linda, J., John, R. T., & Christiane, V. (2004). Surveying the cites: a ranking of marketing journals using citation analysis. Marketing Education Review, 14(1), 45–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamelman, P. W., & Mazze, E. M. (1973). Cross-referencing between AMA journals and other publications. Journal of Marketing Research, 10, 215–218 (May). doi:10.2307/3149833.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hult, G., Tomas, M., William, T. N., & Bashaw, R. E. (1997). Faculty perceptions of marketing journals. Journal of Marketing Education, 19(1), 37–52. doi:10.1177/027347539701900105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jobber, D., & Simpson, P. (1988). A citation analysis of selected marketing journals. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 5(2), 137–142. doi:10.1016/0167-8116(88)90065-1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kenny, D. A. (1979). Correlation and causality. New York, NY: John Wiley and Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kurtz, D. L., Velliquette, A. M., Garretson, J. A., Dhodapkar, S., & Olson, J. (1997). An evaluation of the marketing theory seminar in Ph.D. programs: teaching alternatives and future directions. Marketing Education Review, 7(2), 1–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lam, S. Y., Chau, A. W.-L., & Wong, T. J. (2007). Thumbnails as online product displays: how consumers process them. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 21(1), 36–59. doi:10.1002/dir.20073.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luke, R. H., & Reed, D. E. (1987). Marketing journal hierarchies and faculty perceptions, 1986-1987. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 15(1), 74–78. doi:10.1007/BF02721957.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, J., Hofacker, C. F., & Mizerski, R. M. (2006). Primacy and recency effects on clicking behavior. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 11(2). doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2006.00025.x.

  • Nowlis, S. M., & Simonson, I. (1997). Attribute-task compatibility as a determinant of consumer preference reversals. Journal of Marketing Research, 34(2), 205–218. doi:10.2307/3151859.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parasuraman, A. (2000). Technology Readiness Index (TRI): A multiple-item scale to measure readiness to embrace new technologies. Journal of Service Research, 2(4), 307–320. doi:0.1177/109467050024001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pasadeos, Y. (1985). A bibliometric study of advertising citations. Journal of Advertising Research, 14(4), 52–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Polonsky, M. J., & Whitelaw, P. (2005). What are we measuring when we evaluate journals? Journal of Marketing Education, 27(2), 189–201. doi:10.1177/0273475305276842.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stewart, D. W. (2007). New and improved! a look at the future. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 35(1), 1–4. doi:10.1007/s11747-007-0023-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tellis, G. J., Chandy, R. K., & Ackerman, D. S. (1999). In search of diversity: the record of major marketing journals. Journal of Marketing Research, 36, 120–131 (February). doi:10.2307/3151920.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Theoharakis, V., & Hirst, A. (2002). Perceptual differences of marketing journals: a worldwide perspective. Marketing Letters, 13(4), 389–402. doi:10.1023/A:1020378718456.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tversky, A., Sattath, S., & Slovic, P. (1988). Contingent weighting in judgment and choice. Psychological Review, 95(3), 371–384. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.95.3.371.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Urbanic, F. R., & Sailors, J. F. (1996). Marketing journals: a study of university library holdings. Journal of Business & Finance Librarianship, 2(2), 17–33. doi:10.1300/J109v02n02_03.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zinkhan, G. M. (2004). Accessing academic research through an e-database: issues of journal quality and knowledge use. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 32(4), 369–370. doi:10.1177/0092070304267963.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zinkhan, G. M., & Leigh, T. W. (1999). Assessing the quality ranking of the Journal of Advertising, 1986-1997. Journal of Advertising, 28(2), 51–70.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. College of Business, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL, 32306-1110, USA

    Charles F. Hofacker, Mark R. Gleim & Stephanie J. Lawson

Authors
  1. Charles F. Hofacker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mark R. Gleim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Stephanie J. Lawson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Charles F. Hofacker.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hofacker, C.F., Gleim, M.R. & Lawson, S.J. Revealed reader preference for marketing journals. J. of the Acad. Mark. Sci. 37, 238–247 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-008-0124-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-008-0124-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation